Trends in buprenorphine treatment disparities during the COVID pandemic in Massachusetts.

Background: Racial, sex, and age disparities in buprenorphine treatment have previously been demonstrated. We evaluated trends in buprenorphine treatment disparities before and after the onset of the COVID pandemic in Massachusetts. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from an integrated health system comparing 12-months before and after the March 2020 Massachusetts COVID state of emergency declaration, excluding March as a washout period. Among patients with a clinical encounter during the study periods with a diagnosis of opioid use disorder or opioid poisoning, we extracted outpatient buprenorphine prescription rates by age, sex, race and ethnicity, and language. Generating univariable and multivariable Poisson regression models, we calculated the probability of receiving buprenorphine. Results: Among 4,530 patients seen in the period before the COVID emergency declaration, 57.9% received buprenorphine. Among 3,653 patients seen in the second time period, 55.1% received buprenorphine. Younger patients (<24) had a lower likelihood of receiving buprenorphine in both time periods (adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR), 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42-0.75 before vs. aPR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96 after). Male patients had a greater likelihood of receiving buprenorphine compared to female patients in both time periods (aPR: 1.05; 95% CI, 1.00-1.11 vs. aPR: 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.16). Racial disparities emerged in the time period following the COVID pandemic, with non-Hispanic Black patients having a lower likelihood of receiving buprenorphine compared to non-Hispanic white patients in the second time period (aPR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99). Conclusions: Following the onset of the COVID pandemic in Massachusetts, ongoing racial, age, and gender disparities were evident in buprenorphine treatment with younger, Black, and female patients less likely to be treated with buprenorphine across an integrated health system.

Digital disparities: lessons learned from a patient reported outcomes program during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The collection of patient reported outcomes (PROs) allows us to incorporate the patient's voice into their care in a quantifiable, validated manner. Large-scale collection of PROs is facilitated by the electronic health record and its portal, though, historically, patients have eschewed the portal and completed patient-reported outcome measures in the clinic via tablet. Furthermore, access and use of the portal is associated with known racial inequities. Our institution oversees the largest clinical PRO program in the world, and has a long history of racially equitable PRO completion rates via tablet. However, when the COVID-19 pandemic forced us to remove tablets from clinics and rely exclusively on portal use for PRO completion, profound racial disparities resulted immediately. Our experience quantifiably demonstrates the magnitude of inequity that the portal, in its current configuration, generates and serves as a cautionary tale to other health care systems and electronic health records.

Patient characteristics associated with the successful transition to virtual care: Lessons learned from the first million patients.

INTRODUCTION: The increased use of telehealth to maintain ambulatory care during the COVID-19 pandemic had potential to exacerbate or diminish disparities in access to care. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe patient characteristics associated with successful transition from in-person to virtual care, and video vs audio-only participation. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of electronic health record data from all patients with ambulatory visits from 1 October 2019-30 September 2020 in a large integrated health system in the Northeast USA. The outcome of interest was receipt of virtual care, and video vs audio-only participation. We matched home addresses with census-tract level area social vulnerability index (SVI) and Internet access. Among ambulatory care patients, we used logistic regression to identify characteristics associated with virtual participation. Among virtual participants, we identified characteristics associated with video vs audio-only visits. RESULTS: Among 1,241,313 patients, 528,542 (42.6%) were virtual participants. Relative to in-person only, virtual participants were older, more often English-proficient and with activated patient portal. Characteristics associated with virtual participation included patients with: only behavioural health visits, COVID patients, highest quartile of visit frequency, and multiple visit types. Characteristics associated with video participation (relative to audio-only) included being younger and patients with: only behavioural health visits, highest quartile of visit frequency, non-Hispanic black race, limited English proficiency and inactivated portal account. DISCUSSION: In our regional healthcare system, the transition to virtual care during COVID was vital for continued access to care, but substantial inequity remained. Without audio-only visits, access to care would have been even more limited for our most vulnerable patients.

The essential role of population health during and beyond COVID-19.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has fundamentally changed how health care systems deliver services and revealed the tenuousness of care delivery based on face-to-face office visits and fee-for-service reimbursement models. Robust population health management, fostered by value-based contract participation, integrates analytics and agile clinical programs and is adaptable to optimize outcomes and reduce risk during population-level crises. In this article, we describe how mature population health programs in a learning health system have been rapidly leveraged to address the challenges of the pandemic. Population-level data and care management have facilitated identification of demographic-based disparities and community outreach. Telemedicine and integrated behavioral health have ensured critical primary care and specialty access, and mobile health and postacute interventions have shifted site of care and optimized hospital utilization. Beyond the pandemic, population health can lead as a cornerstone of a resilient health system, better prepared to improve public health and mitigate risk in a value-based paradigm.

Differences in the use of telephone and video telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced health systems to offer video and telephone visits as in-person visit alternatives. Although video visits offer some benefits compared with telephone visits, they require complex setup, which may disadvantage some patients due to the "digital divide." Our objective was to determine patient and neighborhood characteristics associated with visit modality. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study across 1652 primary care and specialty care practices of adult patients at an integrated health system from April 23 to June 1, 2020. METHODS: We used electronic health record and administrative data. Our primary outcome was visit modality (in-person, video, or telephone), which was captured using billing codes. We assessed predictors of using video vs telephone using multivariable logistic regression. We used hierarchical logistic regression to determine the contribution of patient-, physician-, and practice-level components of variance in the choice of video or telephone visits. RESULTS: We analyzed 231,596 visits by 162,102 patients. Sixty-five percent of the visits were virtual (31.7% telephone, 33.5% video). Patients who were older than 65 years (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.40-0.43), Black (AOR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.57-0.63), Hispanic (AOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.73-0.80), Spanish-speaking (AOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.61), and from areas with low broadband access (AOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.98) were less likely to use video visits. Practices (38%) and clinicians (26%) drove more of the variation in video visit use than patients (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine access differences may compound disparities in chronic disease and COVID-19 outcomes. Institutions should monitor video visit use across demographics and equip patients, clinicians, and practices to promote telemedicine equity.

Digital triage: Novel strategies for population health management in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created unique challenges for the U.S. healthcare system due to the staggering mismatch between healthcare system capacity and patient demand. The healthcare industry has been a relatively slow adopter of digital innovation due to the conventional belief that humans need to be at the center of healthcare delivery tasks. However, in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic, artificial intelligence (AI) may be used to carry out specific tasks such as pre-hospital triage and enable clinicians to deliver care at scale. Recognizing that the majority of COVID-19 cases are mild and do not require hospitalization, Partners HealthCare (now Mass General Brigham) implemented a digitally-automated pre-hospital triage solution to direct patients to the appropriate care setting before they showed up at the emergency department and clinics, which would otherwise consume resources, expose other patients and staff to potential viral transmission, and further exacerbate supply-and-demand mismatching. Although the use of AI has been well-established in other industries to optimize supply and demand matching, the introduction of AI to perform tasks remotely that were traditionally performed in-person by clinical staff represents a significant milestone in healthcare operations strategy.

Changes in hospital admissions for urgent conditions during COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patients are deferring necessary care for urgent conditions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and, if so, to what extent. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Using billing data from 8 acute care hospitals, we identified 9 principal medical diagnoses from International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes across 4 medical specialties (cardiology, gastroenterology, neurology, and urology). In addition, we defined a combined obstetrical falsification end point. We compared daily admission rates during the pandemic period (3/1/2020-4/30/2020) with the same dates in 2019 (3/1/2019-4/30/2019). As a reference, we also compared a prepandemic period in the same years (1/1/2019-2/28/2019 and 1/1/2020-2/29/2020). We compared admission rates between years using t tests. RESULTS: There were 3219 admissions for the conditions of interest during the study period in 2019 and 2661 in 2020. There was no difference in prepandemic daily admission rates in 2020 compared with 2019 (29.04 vs 27.63 admissions per day; -4.9%; P = .50). During the pandemic period, there was a 33.7% decrease in admission rates for all conditions combined in 2020 compared with 2019 (24.68 vs 16.37; -33.7%; P = .03). By specialty, the combined gastroenterology (10.22 vs 7.20; -29.6%; P = .02) and cardiovascular (2.34 vs 1.29; -44.7%; P = .05) end points demonstrated reduction in daily admission rates. CONCLUSIONS: Daily admission rates during the COVID-19 pandemic were lower for these acute medical conditions. Public awareness campaigns are urgently needed to reassure the public about the safety of presenting for care.